Examining the Relation between Humor Acts of School ... · where different points of view can live...

2

Examining the Relation between Humor Acts of School Principals and

Teachers’ Exposure Level to Mobbing and Organizational Cynicism

Based on the Perceptions of Teachers

Necati Cemaloğlu

Fatma Kalkan

Emine Dağlı

Adem Çilek

Gazi University, Turkey

Main purpose of this study is to determine the relation between humor acts of school principals and

exposure level of teachers to mobbing and organizational cynicism based on the perceptions of

teachers who serve at primary schools. 550 teachers who serve at primary and secondary public

schools in Yenimahalle district, Ankara Province and participated in “My Leader Teacher Project”

in 2012-2013 acedemic year constitute the population. 232 teachers who have been chosen using

simple random sampling based on the principle of voluntariness constitute the research sample.

Descriptive statistics, Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient and hierarchical regression

are used to perform data analysis. In consequence of the study, it is discovered that school

principals exhibit non-humorous acts more and cynical humorous acts at the least; teachers suffer

from mobbing although it is not severe; they have medium-level organizational cynicism and

although humor acts of principals affect teachers’ exposure levels to mobbing and organizational

cynicism; despite the stong relation between mobbing and organizational cynicism, mobbing does

not have an intermediary effect on the relation between humor acts and organizational cynicism.

Key Words: Organizational Humor, Psychological Mobbing, Organizational Cynicism

2014 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TEACHING AND EDUCATION Vol. II (No. 1)

http://www.iises.net ISSN 2336-2022

3

1. Introduction

Reviewing the literature on organizational psychology, it is seen that organizational cynism is

prominent and this variable is important for today’s organisations which have the aim of holding

human resources for a long time and benefiting them in the most effective way. Therefore,

organizational cynism is an issue which affects interpersonal relations and results of organizational

functioning and which must be solved by modern organisations (Neves, 2012, 975). Modern

organisations are in the struggle for revealing the reasons of cynism for business to proceed in a

healthier environment and taking precautions against cynism. Studies are performed for this

purpose; reasons and results of cynism which affects the business life are tried to determine.

Studies on the relations among business-related results of individual and organizational cynism

show that cynism has a negative influence on organizational commitment and job satisfaction

(Reichers, Wanous and Austin, 1997), organizational citizenship behavior (Andersson and

Bateman, 1997; Kabataş, 2010; Abraham, 2000; Johnson ve O’Leary-Kelly, 2003; Yetim and

Ceylan, 2011), organizational identification and organizational commitment (Polat ve Meydan,

2010; Abraham, 2000), and causes job dissatisfaction, alieniation (Abraham, 2000), occupational

stress, emotional exhaustion (James, 2005). Furthermore, negative acts integrated in organizational

cynism cause employee to separate from organization; drift apart organizational values; experience

incongruity with organization and lack of faith in organization (Yetim ve Ceylan, 2011).

Examining the reasons of organizational cynism, it can be observed that they may be individual and

organisational. Organizational cynism lives on socio-psychological condition and structure of

individuals and it is also affected by complicated and changeable environment; external pressure

powers and external dependency of managers (Kılıç, 2013). Age, gender, educational status, marital

status, income, period of service, hierarchy constitute the individual factors leading to

organizational cynism; and organizational justice, organizational policies, breach of psychological

contract constitute organizational factors (Kalağan, 2009; Polat, 2007; Chiaburu, Peng, Oh, Banks

ve Lomeli, 2013). One of the organizational factors of organizational cynism is the ability of being

a manager. This is because in consequence of the attitudes and behaviors of managers against

employees, they become cynical (Fortier, 2003). There are some studies (Davis and Gardner,

2004; Wu, Neubert, Yi, 2007; Bommer, Rich ve Rubin, 2005; Broner and Nichols, 2003; Güçlü,

Kalkan and Dağlı, 2013) revealing the existence of a relation between the leadership style which

has an influence on manager’s attitude and behaviors; and organizational cynism. Leadership style

is one of the most significant variables in improving satisfaction and performance of employees

(Warrick, 1981). Although attitudes of a leader influence his followers, they also have an important

role in his own success and failure (Rubin, Dierdorff, Bommer and Baldwin, 2009). Thus, it can be

suggested that attitude of a leader may be related to organizational cynism which is one of the

results of interpersonal relationships. Attitudes and behaviors of a leader may be either preventive

or initiator condition of employees’ negative attitudes against an organization.

There are some studies demonstrating that leadership behaviors of a manager lead to cynism as well

as mobbing (Cemaloğlu, 2007a; Cemaloğlu and Kılınç, 2012; Ertürk, 2011, s.186; Okçu, 2011, s.

148). Mobbing affects directly the level of stress, exhaustion and job satisfaction level; and

furthermore, life satisfaction level decreases due to these three variables (Karakuş and Çankaya,

2012, s. 232). Tınaz (2006) claims that atmosphere of distrust, negative organizational climate,

ebbing of general respect and collapse of organizational culture are among the important results of

mobbing.

Examining other reasons for mobbing, it can be observed that personality traits of manager (Gökçe,

2012, s. 280), his vocational competence and disciplinary practices (Ertürk, 2011, s. 186),

supportive attitudes (Dick and Wagner, 2001, s.256), humorous acts (Cemaloğlu, Şahin and Daşcı,

2013) have an effect on teachers’ suffering from mobbing. However, manager’s sense of humor has

a special place in mobbing. This is because all humorous acts do not lead to mobbing. Mobbing

occurs upon the usage type of humor. Various studies show that in the event of negative use of

humor, positive emotions decrease (Samson ve Gross, 2012, p. 381) and organizational

commitment level of employees diminishes (Romero ve Arendt, 2011, p. 657). However, it is



4

established that if using humor in a positive way, it improves positive emotions (Samson and Gross,

2012, p. 381), ensures establishing good relationships (Banas, Dunbar, Rodriguez and Liu, 2011, p.

122; Özdemir, Sezgin, Kaya and Recepoğlu, 2011, p. 423), increases the motivation of employees

(Recepoğlu, Kılınç and Çepni, 2011, p. 928), diminishes organizational stress, eases the problems

of employees (Malone, 1980, p.360) and enhances productivity (Avolio, Howell and Sosik, 1999,

p. 223).

It appears that employees are bound to experience cynism in consequence of manager’s negative

sense of humor. In other words, mobbing levels which employees experience based on managers’

leadership behaviors affect negatively their attitudes against organization. Cynicism which is

characterized by despair, intimidation, detention, exhaustion and frustration is related to

humiliation, disgust and distrust. In this sense, cynicism and mobbing which may be encountered in

every organization are closely related problems which have individual and organizational

destructive effects (Gül and Ağıröz, 2011). In literature, it is possible to see the studies on

determining the relation between mobbing and cynism. In these studies, it is established that

mobbing and organizational cynism are related (Ayduğan, 2012; Gül and Ağıröz, 2011; Apaydın,

2012; Lobnikar and Pagon, 2004; Andersson and Bateman, 1999), mobbing has an effect upon

organizational cynicism and the most pathetic dimension of mobbing is “attacks on the self-

expression and communication of an individual” (Ayduğan, 2012).

Studies performed at educational institutions suggest that teachers are both exposed to mobbing

(Dick ve Wagner, 2001, s. 254; Gündüz and Yılmaz, 2008, s.278; Ocak, 2008, s. 92; Riley, Duncan

and Edwards, 2009, s.5; Sağlam, 2008, s.139) and experience organizational cynism (Güzeller ve

Kalağan, 2010; Özgan, Çetin, Kulekçi, 2011; Helvacı and Çetin, 2012; Sağır and Oğuz, 2012;

Topkaya, Altınkurt, Yılmaz and Dilek, 2013, Kılınç, 2013; Ertek, 2009). Furthermore, educators

who are in manager position are in the center of both organizational problems (Dick and Wagner,

2001, s. 254; Gökçe, 2012, s. 281; Ocak, 2008, s. 96; Riley, Duncan and Edwards, 2009, s.5;

Broner, ve Nichols, 2003). Particularly, considering that humorous act of managers may have a

significant effect on negative acts experienced at educational institutions and studies on this issue

are limited in Turkey, performing studies which deal with these three variables altogether may play

an important role in preventing and resolving these problems. In this study, the relation among

humorous acts of school principals and mobbing experiencing level of teachers and organizational

cynicism is examined based on teachers’ perception.

1.2. Purpose

Main purpose of this study is to determine the relation among humorous acts of school principals

serving at primary schools and mobbing experiencing level of teachers and organizational cynicism

based on teachers’ perceptions who serve at primary schools.

Answers of the following questions will be searched in order to reach the mentioned purpose.

According to teachers’ perceptions,

1. What are the perceptions pertaining the dimensions of humorous acts of primary school

principals (humor which denies non-humorous style, approving humor, productive social

humor, cynical humor), mobbing and the dimensions of organizational cynicism (cognitive,

affective and behavioral)?

2. What kind of a relation is there between humorous acts of primary school principals and

mobbing and organizational cynicism which teachers perceive?

3. What level and direction do humor acts of primary school principals affect the mobbing and

organizational cynicism which teachers perceive?

4. Does the mobbing perceived by teachers have an intermediary effect on the relation humor

acts of school principals and organizational cynicism of teachers?



5

2. Literature Review and Prior Researches

2.1. Humor

Starting from Plato, one of the antique age philosophers, humor has been a concept which attracts

attention of such disciplines as philosophy, literature, sociology, anthropology and psychology for

ages. It is claimed that main subject of it is human and humor is everywhere human exists (Eroğlu,

2003). Humor is the ability of seeing entertaining part of situations and conditions (Akkaya, 2011).

Humor is considered to be an experience which is generally initiated by a comic stimulation, ends

in such a behavior as a smile or laugh and usually gives contentedness (Susa, 2002: 45).

Furthermore, humor may be defined as “an irony which pursues the goal of entertaining, amusing

and making fun of somebody without hurting him” and thus substantially having entertainment and

tolerance (Yardımcı, 2010).

Origin of “Mizah”, modern version of which is “gülmece” is Arabic. “Mizah” is defined as joke,

pleasantry and entertaining in Osmanlıca-Türkçe Ansiklopedik Lügat (Encyclopedic Dictionary of

Ottoman Turkish-Modern Turkish) (Develioğlu, 2007). However, humor includes such concepts as

sagaciousness and wittiness (Akkaya, 2011). Humor creates and feeds critical thinking and vice

versa. Critical thinking can be created and developed in tolerant and productive world of humor

where different points of view can live together (Özdemir, 2010).

Humor concept and concepts related to it are used frequently to define what kind of a personality a

person has. Such concepts as “comic”, “witty”, “having sense of humor” are the adjectives which

can be heard about people in daily life (Çetin, 2009). Babad (1974, s.618) classifies people in five

categories according to their humor acts: non-humorous,

passive appreciators, producers, reproducers and producers-reproducers. A person who has non-

humorous style does not laugh a lot, make jokes, produce humor; a person who has an appreciative

style appreciates humorous discourse and acts, likes jokes and responds humor by laughing. As for

social-producer humor, humor is produced and shared with other individuals (Martin, 2007). In

rejectionist humor style, individual does not approve humorous attitude, discourse and acts and

refuses them; in cynical humor style, making fool of somebody, humiliation, exclusion and offense

are involved (Babad 1974, s.618).

2.2. Mobbing

In recent years, scientist who study on management and working psychology have determined a

new alienation from workplace phenomenon which results from a psychological problem related to

the workplace (Tınaz, 2006). Mobbing is used to define aggressive and violent behaviors which a

person is or some people are systematically and repetitively exposed by a person or group for a long

time (Einarsen, 2000, s.380). In mobbing, superiors, co-workers or some people become a “gang”

and aim at somebody (Baykal, 2005, 8). People who are exposed to mobbing become functionless

due to the magnitude and effect of the damage from which they suffer (Özdemir and Açıkgöz,

2007).

Mobbing is practiced through repetitive offenses by other employees or employers; it is a kind of

psychological violenceand generally aims at intimidating the employee and suspending him from

workplace. Giving a nickname, looking for a scapegoat, unjust workload, sexual abuse and

physical offenses are deliberate actions aiming at intimidating, embarrassing, frustrating, bullying,

frightening and hurting the person who is targeted (Einarsen, 2000, s.380). Even, possibility of

slight physical violence beyond verbal violence is sometimes in question (Tınaz, Bayram and Ergin,

2008). Leymann (1996) describes 45 different mobbing acts and classifies them in 5 different

groups based on the characteristics of the behaviors as; offenses on self-expression and

communication, social relations, reputation, life quality and occupation and direct offenses on

individual’s health. These behaviors occur at certain intervals (once in a week or more statistically)

and continue for a length of time (6 months or more statistically) (Leymann, 1996; Tutar et. Al.,

2010; Özler, Atalay and Şahin, 2008).



6

The reasons for the emergence of mobbing may be analyzed under 3 different headings. These are

personality traits of sufferer and the person who performs mobbing and organizational reasons

(Poyraz and Aksoy,). According to Leymann (1996), those who perform mobbing apply mobbing in

order to compensate their own deficiency. Horror and distrust which they feel on behalf of their

position and themselves impel them to exhibit insulting behaviors. In this respect, mobbing is a

personality problem. Certain administrative and organizational reasons which cause mobbing to

appear can be expressed as follows (Shallcross, 2003:7; Tınaz, 2006b:4): intensive hierarchical

structure, lack of problem solving ability in organization or ineffective conflict management, weak

leadership, bad management, stressful workplace, unethical practices etc.

2.3. Organizational Cynicism

Organizational cynicism is a negative attitude of employees against organization (Helvacı and

Çetin, 2012). Organizational cynicism also includes emotions and opinions which incline to

“negative emotion” related to organization, “insulting” and “faultfinding” behaviors. Organizational

cynicism is defined as implicit or explicit harsh criticism which is given related to the organization,

negative opinions and negative beliefs (Kalağan, 2009).

Basic notion in organizational cynicism is about deficiency of righteousness, honesty, justice and

sincerity. Leaders in organization breach the mentioned principles in order to derive personal

benefit. However, they lead to behaviors which are based on latent motives and tricks in

organization (Abraham, 2000, s.269).

Organizational cynicism is negative attitude of an individual against the organization at which he

works; in addition, it is comprised of cognitive, affective and behavioral dimensions. It is

expressed in a more explicit was as follows: (1) the belief that organization lacks integrity; (2)

negative feeling against organization; (3) tendency of being faultfinding and abusive against

organization which is consistent with these feelings and emotions (Dean et al., 1998).

Organizational cynicism results from the fact that employees have negative future expectations,

their organizational and individual future expectations do not constitute integrity, future of

organization presents uncertainty and future of organization is affected negatively (Kılıç, 2013). It

can be argued that those who perform a work in a cynical way believe that managers sacrifice such

principles as justice, honesty and sincerity on the altar of individual interest and the management

makes choices based on individual interest (Naus et al. 2007).

Knowing the reasons and results of cynicism enables managers to manage success and negative

consequences of cynicism, if any, appropriately. Being aware of the factors affecting organizational

cynicism will prevent managers to take steps which may result in negative consequences (Çetin and

Helvacı, 2012).

According to Özgener and Kaplan (2008), certain effective strategies must be practiced in order to

manage cynicism phenomena which emerge in organizations. Certain strategies related to managing

organizational cynicism are as the following: enabling employees to participate in related decision

making processes, rewarding managers’ behaviors which are relationship-oriented, mentoring

employees, creating a constant and fair disciplinary system in organization, managing the

competition in the organization, acquainting employees with changes, improving time-saving

practices, adopting an emphatic approach, increasing reliability.

3. Method

In this section, information about research model, population and sample, data collection tools and

data analysis are presented.

3.1. Research Model

This research has relational screening model. According to Karasar (1994), screening models are

research approaches which aim at describing a current or past situation as it is or was. There are

three variables in a research model including two independent and one dependent variable.



7

However, mobbing is considered to be both a dependent and independent variable due to the fact

that it has a direct and indirect effect on organizational cynicism.

Sub-dimensions of humorous act (non-humorous style, approving humor, productive social humor,

cynical humor) form a part of independent variables of a research model. Mobbing is the other

independent variable of the research. Dependent variable of the research is cognitive, affective and

behavioral attitudes which are sub-dimensions of organizational cynicism.

In the study, teachers’ perceptions pertaining humorous acts of principals and sub-dimensions of

organizational cynicism and mobbing are examined. Moreover, it is determined to what extend the

level of exhibiting humorous acts of primary school principals affects the mobbing and

organizational cynicism which are perceived by teachers and whether or not mobbing is an

intermediary variable between humorous acts and organizational cynicism.

3.2. Population and Sample

550 teachers who serve at primary and secondary public schools in Yenimahalle district, Ankara

Province and participated in “My Leader Teacher Project” in 2012-2013 academic year constitute

the population. 232 teachers who have been chosen using simple random sampling based on the

principle of voluntariness constitute the research sample. Demographic information on teachers who

participate in the study is presented in Table 1.

Table 1.

Distribution of Type of School, Gender, Service of Teachers

Gender N % Service n % Type of School N %

Female 45 19.6 Class 124 53.9 Primary 135 58.7

Male 185 80.4 Branch 106 46.1 Secondary 94 40.9

Total 230 100 Total 230 100 Total 229 99.6

Examining the data in Table1, it is seen that 19.6% and 80.4% of participants are female and male,

respectively. % 53.9% are classroom teachers, 46.1% are branch teachers. In addition, 58.7% and

40.9% serve at primary and secondary schools, respectively.

3.3. Data Collection Tools

Humorous Acts Questionnaire: Humorous Acts Questionnaire which has been developed by

Cemaloğlu, Recepoğlu, Şahin, Daşcı and Köktürk (2012) is utilized for principals’ sense of humor

in the study. This questionnaire which consists of 30 items approach humor in five different

dimensions. There are 3 items measuring “Non-humorous style” (Sample item (SI): the principal

does not joke with anybody), 5 items measuring “rejectionist humor” (SI: the principal does not

consider the people who make jokes as reliable), 5 items measuring “approving humor” (SI: the

principal smiles when a joke is made), 9 items measuring “productive-social humor” (SI: the

principal likes to make people laugh) and 8 items measuring “cynical humor” (SI: the principal

saddens us with his humor style) Total of factor dimensions of the questionnaire accounts for

70,10% of the questionnaire . Internal consistency coefficients which are calculated for each

dimension of the questionnaire vary between .86 and .94. Reliability coefficient which is calculated

for the whole questionnaire is .92. Cronbach’s Alpha reliability coefficients which are calculated

for each dimension of humor in this study are between .86 and .94. Reliability coefficient which is

calculated for the whole questionnaire is .85. In consequence of exploratory factor analysis, Kaiser-

Meyer-Olkin (KMO) value is .94 and Barlett’s test for sphericity is meaningful (p=.00). It is

observed that the items come under five factors as in the original questionnaire. Factor load values

vary between.57 and .85. The questionnaire measures 69% of the total variance.

Negative Acts Questionnaire: Negative Acts Questionnaire which was developed by Einarsen and

Raknes (1997) and adapted in Turkish by Cemaloğlu (2007) has been used to determine the

mobbing exposure level of the teachers. Cronbach’s Alpha reliability coefficient which is calculated



8

for this questionnaire which consists of 21 items (SI: Exposure to a workload which cannot be

overcome) and measures negative acts in one dimension is .94. Reliability coefficient which is

calculated in this study is .95. In consequence of exploratory factor analysis, KMO value is .95 and

Barlett’s test for sphericty is meaningful (p=.00). The questionnaire accounts for 65% of the total

variance. Item factor load values vary between.57 and .80. It is observed that questionnaire items

concentrate on one dimension.

Organizational Cynicism Questionnaire: This questionnaire was developed by Brandes,

Dhalwadkar and Dean (1999) and adapted by Kalağan (2009). There are 13 items which are

prepared in the form of Likert-type five point assessment (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly

agree). Organizational cynicism questionnaire has three sub-dimensions as cognitive, affective and

behavioral. There are five, four and four items in cognitive, affective and behavioral dimensions,

respectively. These three factors account for 79% of total variance. Internal consistency coefficient

of the questionnaire is calculated .931 for the total of the items. Internal consistency coefficients of

Organizational Cynicism Questionnaire are calculated .913, .948 and .866, respectively. Structure

reliability values are calculated 0, 70 and over for three dimensions. Variance values are 0, 50 and

over for three dimensions.

3.4. Data Analysis

Descriptive statistics, Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient and hierarchical regression

are used to perform data analysis.

4. Findings and Comments

In this section, research findings are presented systematically and comments on research findings

are given. In Table 1, descriptive statistics related to humorous acts of school principals and

teachers’ exposure level to mobbing and organizational cynicism based on teachers’ perceptions are

presented.

Table 2.

Descriptive Statistics Related To Humorous Acts of School Principals and Teachers’ Exposure

Level To Mobbing And Organizational Cynicism Based On Teachers’ Perceptions (n = 232)

Questionnaires Sub Questionnaires Number of Items Χ S

Humorous Acts

Non-humorous style 3 2.90 1.14

Rejectionist humor 5 2.42 1.04

Approving Humor 5 2.82 0.98

Productive-social humor 9 2.38 1.02

Cynical Humor 8 2.02 1.06

Mobbing Mobbing 21 1.60 .769

Organizational

Cynicism

Cognitive 5 2.92 1.19

Affective 4 2.55 .606

Behavioral 4 2.93 .913

Examining data in Table 2, it is observed that based on teachers’ opinions, school principals exhibit

“non-humorous style” at the most with Χ =2.82 level and “cynical humorous acts” at the least with

Χ =2.02 level. Furthermore, mobbing exposure level of teachers is calculated Χ =1.60. It is

discovered that teachers exhibit attitudes which are in the dimensions of “behavioral”, at the most,

and “affective”, at the least, with “Χ =2.93 and Χ =2.55 levels, respectively.

Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient has been considered to determine what level and

direction humorous acts of primary school principals affect the mobbing and organizational

cynicism which teachers perceive.



9

Table 3.

Results of Correlation Analysis Related To Humorous Acts of School Principals and Teachers’

Exposure Level to Mobbing and Organizational Cynicism

Dimension 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

1. Non-humorous 1

2. Rejectionist .67** 1

3. Approving -.44** -.42** 1

4. Productive-social -.50** -.35** 76** 1

5. Cynical .27** .57** -.17** .01 1

6. Mobbing .22** .42** -.23** -.19** .48** 1

7. Cognitive .35** .49** -.31** -.31** .45** .58** 1

8. Affective .27** .56** .35** .16* .35** .25** .13* 1

9. Behavioral .26** .27** -.24** -.23** -.19** .34** .56** .08 1

*p<.05 ** p<.01

Examining data in Table 3, there is a positive and strong relation between approving humor and

productive-social humor (r=.76, p<.01) which are among positive humor acts. Negative humor acts

also exhibit a positive directional and meaningful relation among themselves. Examining the

relationship between humorous acts and mobbing, it is observed that there is a positive and

meaningful relation between mobbing and non-humorous style (r=.22, p<.01), rejectionist humor

(r=.42, p<.01) and cynical humor (r=.48, p<.01) acts; there is a negative directional and meaningful

relation between mobbing and approving humor (r=-.44, p<.01) and productive-social humor (r=-

.19, p<.01) acts. The highest relation level related to mobbing is seen in cynical humor (r=.48,

p<.01) and rejectionist humor (r=.42, p<.01) dimensions.

In other words, an increase in mobbing exposure levels of teachers can be observed as cynical and

rejectionist humor acts of school principals increase; a decrease in the mentioned can be observed

as approving and productive-social humor acts of school principals increase.

There is a positive relationship between cognitive dimension of organizational cynicism and

affective (r=.13, p<.01) and behavioral (r=.56, p<.01) dimensions. However, there is not a

meaningful relationship between affective and behavioral dimensions. There is a negative

relationship between cognitive and behavioral dimensions of organizational cynicism and approving

humor (r=-.31, p<.01) and productive-social humor (r=-.31, p<.01) dimensions of humor acts. In

addition, there is a positive relationship between cognitive and behavioral dimensions of

organizational cynicism and non-humorous, rejectionist and cynical humor dimensions of humor

acts. Organizational cynicism has a positive relation with both all humor acts and mobbing.

Moreover, there is a positive relation between mobbing and all dimensions of organizational

cynicism.

In other words, an increase in teachers’ exposure levels to organizational cynicism in cognitive and

behavioral dimensions can be observed as cynical and rejectionist humor acts of school principals

increase; a decrease in the mentioned can be observed as approving and productive-social humor

acts of school principals increase. Furthermore, teachers’ organizational cynicism increases as

mobbing perception of teachers increase.



10

Table 4.

Results of Regression Analysis Aiming to Determine the Intermediary Relation of Mobbing Between

Humorous Acts and Organizational Cynicism

Variables R² F B β t p

1st Step: Model 1 .07 17.01

Fixed Value 14.41 6.83 .00

Humor .26 .26 2.83 .00*

Dependent Variable: Mobbing

R² F B β t p

2nd Step: Model 2 .59 123.99

Fixed Value 21.01 13.39 .00

Mobbing .47 .59 11.12 .00*

Dependent Variable: Cynicism

R² F B β t p

3rd Step: Model 3 .03 8.03 3.03

Fixed Value 26.17 .00

Humor .15 .18 4.12 .01*


R² F B β t p

4th Step: Model 4 .35 61.95

Fixed Value 19.49 6.08 .00

Humor .02 .03 .55 .59

Mobbing .46 .59 10.58 .00*


*p<.05 ** p<.01

Examining the data in Table 4, in the first regression analysis, it is ascertained that humor

(independent variable) affects mobbing (intermediary variable) in a positive and meaningful way (ß

= .263; p < .05). In consequence of the second regression analysis, it is ascertained that mobbing

(intermediary variable) affects organizational cynicism (dependent variable) in a positive and

meaningful way (ß = .594; p < .05).

In consequence of the third regression analysis, it is ascertained that humor act (independent

variable) affects organizational cynicism (dependent variable) in a positive and meaningful way (ß

= .184; p < .05). This relation between humor act and organizational cynicism is a weak relation.

Nevertheless, existence of such a relation is stated. Humor acts of principal affect teachers’ job

satisfaction and organizational cynicism in a positive way although this relation is weak.

In consequence of the last regression analysis, it is ascertained that mobbing does not have a

meaningful intermediary effect (.586; p > .05) on the relation between humor acts and

organizational cynicism. As is seen, although humor acts of principals affect teachers’ level of

exposure to mobbing and organizational cynicism and despite the strong relation between mobbing

and organizational cynicism, mobbing does not have an intermediary effect on the relation between

humor acts and organizational cynicism.

5. Conclusion and Discussion

In this study, it is discovered that school principals exhibit non-humorous acts more and cynical

humorous acts at the least; as cynical, non-humorous and rejectionist humor acts of school

principals increase, teachers’ exposure to mobbing and cynicism in the cognitive and affective

dimensions increase; as productive-social humor and approving humor acts increase, teachers’

exposure to mobbing and cynicism in the cognitive and affective dimensions decrease.

The first sub-problem of the study has been presented as “What are the perceptions pertaining the

dimensions of humor acts of primary school principals (humor which denies non-humorous style,



11

approving humor, productive social humor, cynical humor), mobbing and the dimensions of

organizational cynicism (cognitive, affective and behavioral)?”. Examining the findings related to

this sub-problem; it is observed that school principals exhibit non-humorous acts more and cynical

humorous acts at the least. The findings of the studies performed by Romero and Arendt, (2011, s.

656) and Cemaloğlu, Şahin and Daşcı (2003) support the findings of this study. Headmasters bear

more responsibility than other individuals and thus have influence on the school climate more than

everybody. Humor is a very useful tool for headmasters (Koonce, 1997). Leaders may use humor

for various reasons. Headmasters may use humor as a creative communication tool (Tutlte, 2006).

Considering that schoolteaching is a very stressful profession (Recepoğlu, 2008), it can be

suggested that their ability to articulate a negative reaction by softening it and accepting it in a more

humoristic way may lead them to experience negative feelings less in workplace (Çetin, 2009).

Studies performed by Özdemir, Sezgin, Kaya and Recepoğlu, (2011, s. 416) show that humor is a

significant variable related to ways of coping with stress and manager’s sense of humor has an

effect on the job satisfaction of teachers (Recepoğlu, 2008; Puderbaugh, 2006). Using specific

humor acts in particular situations may be useful in a workplace (Carrica, 2009).

Opinions of the teachers on mobbing fall partly within “Sometimes” interval according to the score

intervals which are taken a basis for assessing data. In this case, it may be claimed that teachers

encounter mobbing acts although they are not severe. Studies performed in the literature indicate

that teachers are exposed to mobbing although it is in different levels. In this respect, findings of

the studies performed by Özekinci (2012), Cemaloğlu and Kılınç (2012, s.146), Ertürk (2011,

s.117), Ertek (2009), Ocak (2008) support the findings of this study. Level differences in teachers’

exposure to mobbing may be related to organizational conditions. Number of people which is an

organizational condition may result in differences in mobbing perception. This is because in the

schools where number of teachers is limited interact with each other more and work in a family

atmosphere. Individuals may avoid practicing mobbing acts due to the fact that they think that

mobbing acts which they will perform in such a small community are easily noticed. Social audit

may be referred here (Ocak, 2008). Researchers agree on the fact that mobbing has different

aspects. Mobbing acts may stem from a superior, co-worker or inferior. Direction of mobbing is

related to organizational culture and hierarchical structure (Ertek, 2009). Some of the organizational

factors which provoke mobbing are extreme hierarchical structure, ineffective operation of

interorganizational communication channels, stressful workplace, little or no team work, bad

management and weak leadership (Shallcross, 2003, 7; Tınaz, 2006, 4). Therefore, it is essential to

know organizational culture and hierarchical structure in order to determine by whom mobbing is

performed.

Opinions of the teachers on mobbing fall partly within “partly agree” interval according to the score

intervals which are taken a basis for assessing data. According to this result, it can be suggested that

organizational cynicism level of teachers is medium-level. This finding tallies with the findings of

the former studies (Arabacı, 2010; Kalağan and Güzeller, 2010; Özgan, Külekçi and Özkan, 2012;

Kılıç, 2013; Topkaya, Altınkurt, Yılmaz and Dilek, 2013). However, Helvacı and Çetin (2012) have

discovered that organizational cynicism perception of primary school teachers within the border of

Uşak province is generally “low level”. In order to understand the reason for difference in

organizational cynicism level of teachers, personal features, workplace characteristics, relation

among the outcomes of work in terms of work motivation and commitment must be considered.

This is because organizational cynicism may be related to characteristics of individual and

workplace or combination of the two (Naus, Ad and Roe 2007). Considering that changing personal

characteristics is difficult or impossible in some cases, cynicism may be prevented by removing

organizational factors which cause organizational cynicism. Thus, a transparent, open and

accountable manner of rule must be adopted in order to prevent organizational cynicism; employees

must be provided with organizational support and an environment which will increase trust toward

management must be secured (Kılıç, 2013).

The second sub-problem of the study has been presented as “What kind of a relation is there

between humorous acts of primary school principals and mobbing and organizational cynicism



12

which teachers perceive?” Examining the findings related to this sub-problem; an increase in

teachers’ exposure levels to organizational cynicism can be observed as cynical and rejectionist

humor acts of school principals increase; a decrease in the mentioned can be observed as approving

and productive-social humor acts of school principals increase. Findings in the related literature

support the findings of this study (Recepoğlu, Kılınç and Çepni, 2011; Cemaloğlu, Şahin and Daşcı,

2013). It is expectable that negative humor acts lead to negative consequences for individual and

organization.

Inconvenient use of humor may invite problems in an organization. To illustrate, mockery, which is

a style of aggressive humor, may alienate people from each other in organizations. Those who

misuse humor may lose trust of people (Savage, 2007). Aggressive humor styles such as mockery,

despisement and humiliation alienate individuals and cause harm to social and interpersonal

relationships (Klein, 2009). Martin (2007) has reached the finding that aggressive humor style has

positive relation with hostility and aggression; negative relation with job satisfaction. In the event of

frequent exposure to negative acts, it is possible that individual suffers from mobbing.

It is observed that as cynical and rejectionist humor acts of school principals increase, teachers’

exposure to mobbing and cynicism in the cognitive and affective dimensions increase; as

productive-social humor and approving humor acts increase, teachers’ exposure to mobbing and

cynicism in the cognitive and affective dimensions decrease. Moreover, teachers’ organizational

cynicism increases as their mobbing perception increases. This finding tallies with the findings of

former studies (Ayduğan, 2012; Gül and Ağıröz, 2011; Lobnikar and Pagon, 2004; Andersson and

Bateman, 1999). It is natural that individuals who encounter negative humor acts and are exposed to

mobbing maintain a negative attitude. Mobbing, which is a professional and cooperation disease,

has certain symptoms as in every physical and psychological disorder (Gül ve Ağıröz, 2011).

Among the symptoms of mobbing are stress, exhaustion, decrease in job and life satisfaction levels

(Karakuş and Çankaya, 2012, s. 232). Cynicism involves a wider scope in terms of despair and

frustration; humiliation and distrust towards different people or objects (Wanous et al., 1994). Thus,

cynicism is a more comprehensive problem than mobbing. Considering organizational cynicism is

an attitude which stems from the experiences in organization, mobbing act to which individuals are

exposed results in organizational cynicism in process of time.

The third sub-problem of the study has been presented as “What level and direction do humorous

acts of primary school principals affect the mobbing and organizational cynicism which teachers

perceive?” Examining the findings related to this sub-problem; it is discovered that humor acts of

school principals predict mobbing and organizational cynicism form which teachers suffer. This

finding shows parallelism with the findings of the studies performed by Cemaloğlu, Şahin and

Daşcı (2013). In addition, it is discovered that mobbing predicts organizational cynicism in the

study. Gül and Ağıröz (2011) have come through the similar results in consequence of their studies.

It is quite expectable that humor act is a meaningful precursor of cynicism or vice versa. Negative

attitudes of school principals such as spreading rumors about teachers through humorous discourse

and acts, teasing them and humiliating them may cause teachers to be alienated from their

profession and become unwilling to serve at the school at which they are currently in charge

(Cemaloğlu, Şahin and Daşcı, 2013).

The fourth sub-problem of the study has been presented as “Does the mobbing perceived by

teachers have an intermediary effect on the relation humorous acts of school principals and

organizational cynicism of teachers?” Examining the findings related to this sub-problem; it is

discovered that mobbing does not have a meaningful intermediary effect on the relation between

humor acts and organizational cynicism. As is seen, although humor acts of principals affect

teachers’ level of exposure to mobbing and organizational cynicism and despite the strong relation

between mobbing and organizational cynicism, mobbing does not have an intermediary effect on

the relation between humor acts and organizational cynicism.

In conclusion, it is discovered that school principals exhibit non-humorous acts more and cynical

humorous acts at the least; teachers suffer from mobbing although it is not severe; they have

medium-level organizational cynicism and despite the strong relation between mobbing and



13

organizational cynicism, mobbing does not have an intermediary effect on the relation between

humor acts and organizational cynicism. It is considered that future studies by examining such

variables as age, gender, rank and demographic variables on humor which may have negative and

positive effects and the other two problems: mobbing and cynicism which are closely related to

each other and have destructive organizational and individual effects will significantly contribute

the literature in terms of the relation of mobbing, cynicism and humor with the aforesaid variables.



14

References

Abraham, R. (2000). Organizational cynicism: bases and consequences. Genetic, Social, and

General Psychology Monographs, 126(3), 269-292.

Akkaya, M. (2011). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin sınıf yönetimi becerileri ile mizah tarzları arasındaki

ilişkinin incelenmesi (İstanbul ili Şişli ilçesi örneği). (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Yeditepe

Üniversitesi, İstanbul.

Apaydın, Ç. (2012). The relationship between workplace bullying and organizational cynicism in

Turkish public universities. African Journal of Business Management, 6 (34), 9649- 9657.

Aarabacı, B. (2010). The effects of depersonalization and organizational cynicism levels on the job

satisfaction of educational inspectors. African Journal of Business Management, 4 (13), 2802-281.

Avolio, B. J.,Howell, J. M., &Sosik, J. J. (1999). A funny thing happened on the way to the bottom

line: Humor as a moderator of leadership style effects. The Academy of Management Journal,

42(2), 219-227.

Ayduğan, N. (2012). Mobbingin örgütsel sinizme etkisi: Beş yıldızlı otel işletmelerinde bir

uygulama. (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi), Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi, Afyon.

Banas, J. A., Dunbar, N., Rodriguez, D., & Liu, S. J. (2011). A review of humor in educational

settings: Four decades of research. Communication Education, 60(1), 115-144.

Baykal, A. N. (2005). Yutucu rekabet kanuni devrindeki mobbing’den günümüze. İstanbul: Sistem

Yayıncılık.

Bommer, W. H., Rich, G. A., & Rubin, R. S. (2005). Changing attitudes about change: longitudinal

effects of transformational leader behavior on employee cynicism about organizational change.

Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(7), 733-753.

Broner, C. ve Nichols, C. R. (2003). Cynicism about organizational change: Disposition, or

leadership's creation? The reactions of K--12 educators undergoing systems change.

http://lbzm01.ust.hk/blog/?p=749 adresinden 18 Aralık 2011 tarihinde alınmıştır.

Cemaloğlu, N. (2007/a). Okul yöneticilerinin liderlik stilleri ile yıldırma arasındaki ilişki. Hacettepe

Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 33, 77–87.

Cemaloğlu, N. (2007/b). The exposure of primary school teachers to bullying: An analysis of

various variables. Social Behavior and Personality, 35(6), 789-802.

Cemaloğlu, N., & Kılınç, A. Ç. (2012). İlköğretim okulu yöneticilerinin etik liderlik davranışları ile

öğretmenlerin algıladıkları örgütsel güven ve yıldırma arasındaki ilişki. Eğitim ve Bilim, 37(165),

137-151.

Cemaloğlu, N., Recepoğlu, E., Şahin, F., Daşcı, E. ve Köktürk, O. (2012). Mizah davranışları

ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 4(693-

716).

Cemaloğlu, N., Şahin, F. ve Daşcı, E. (2013). Öğretmen algılarına göre okul yöneticilerinin mizah

davranışları ile öğretmenlerin yıldırma (mobbing) yaşama düzeyleri arasındaki ilişkinin

incelenmesi. DAHA YAYINLANMADI

Chiaburu, D. S., Peng, A.C., Oh, I., . Banks, G.C. ve Lomeli, L.C. (2013). Antecedents and

consequences of employee organizational cynicism: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational

Behavior, 83, 181–197.

Çetin, M. (2009). The relatıonship between humor styles and job related affective well-being of

employees among different sectors and the moderating effect of social climate (Yayımlanmamış

Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Marmara Üniversitesi, İstanbul.

Carrica, J. L. (2009). Humor styles and leadershıp styles: communıty college presıdents.

(Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). School of Education Colorado State University, Colorado.

Davis, W. D., & Gardner, W. L. (2004). Perceptions of politics and organizational cynicism: an

attributional and leader-member exchange perspective. The Leadership Quarterly 15, 439-465.

Dean, J. W., Brandes, P., & Dhwardkar, R. (1998). Organizational cynicism. Academy of

Management Review, 23, 341-352.

Devellioğlu, F. (2007). Osmanlıca-Türkçe Ansiklopedik Lugat. Ankara: Aydın.



15

Dick, R., & Wagner, U. (2001). Stress and strain in teaching: A structural equation approach.

British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 243-259.

Einarsen, S., & Raknes, B.I. (1997). Harassment in the workplace and the victimization of men.

Violence & Victims, 12(3), 247-263.

Eroğlu, M. (2003). Utangaçlık düzeyleri farklı lise son sınıf öğrencilerinin durumluk mizah tepki

düzeylerinin incelenmesi (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara.

Ertek, S. Ş. (2009). Yıldırma ve yıldırma mağduru öğretmenler üzerine bir araştırma.

(Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Beykent Üniversitesi, İstanbul.

Ertürk, A. (2011). İlköğretim okullarında görevli öğretmen ve yöneticilere yönelik duygusal

yıldırma davranışlarının incelenmesi (Yıldırma davranışlarının meydana gelmesinde etkili olan

faktörler) (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara.

Güçlü, N., Kalkan, F. ve Dağlı, E. (2013). Mesleki ve teknik ortaöğretim okulu öğretmenlerinin

algılarına göre okul müdürlerinin liderlik stilleri ile örgütsel sinizm arasındaki ilişki. 22. Ulusal

Eğitim Bilimleri Kurultayı, Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi, Eskişehir. DAHA SUNULACAK.

Gül, H. ve Ağıröz, A. (2011). Mobbing ve örgütsel sinizm arasındaki ilişkiler: hemşireler üzerinde

bir uygulama. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi, İİBF Dergisi, 12(2).

Gündüz, H. B. ve Yılmaz, Ö. (2008). Ortaöğretim kurumlarında mobbing (yıldırma) davranışlarına

ilişkin öğretmen ve yönetici görüşleri (Düzce il örneği). Milli Eğitim, 179, 269-282

Güzeller, C. ve Kalağan, G. (2010). Öğretmenlerin örgütsel sinizm düzeyinin incelenmesi.

Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 27, 83-97.

Fortier, Isabelle. (2003). Duscepticisme au cynisme: paradoxes des réformes administratives. IRPP

Choix. 9(6). Retrieved April 5, 2010 from www.irpp.org DAHA BULUNMADI

Helvacı, M. A. ve Çetin, A. (2012). İlköğretim okullarında görev yapan öğretmenlerin örgütsel

sinizm düzeylerinin belirlenmesi (Uşak ili örneği). Turkish Studies - International Periodical For

The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 7(3), p. 1475-1497.

James, M. S. L. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of cynicism in organizations: An

examination of the potentıal positive and negative effects on school systems. (Unpublished doctoral

dissertation). The Florida State University, United States.

Johnson, J., & O’Leary-Kelly, A. (2003). The effects of psychological contract breach and

organizational cynicism: not all social exchange violations are created equal. Journal of

Organizational Behavior, 24, 627-647.

Kalağan, G. (2009). Araştırma görevlilerinin örgütsel destek algıları ile örgütsel sinizm tutumları

arasındaki ilişki. (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Akdeniz Üniversitesi, Antalya.

Kalağan, G. ve Güzeller, C. O. (2010). Öğretmenlerin örgütsel sinizm düzeylerinin incelenmesi.

Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Sayı 27, 83-97.

Karakuş, M. ve Çankaya, İ. H. (2012). Öğretmenlerin maruz kaldıkları psikolojik şiddete ilişkin bir

modelin sınanması. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 42, 225-233.

Koonce, W. J., III (1997). The relationship between principals’ humor styles and school climate in

elementary schools (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). George Washington University, United

States.

Kubie, L.S. (1971). The destructive potential of humor in psychotherapy. The American Journal of

Psychiatry, 127, 37-42.

Özgan, H., Külekçi, E., & Özkan, M. (2012). Öğretim elemanlarının örgütsel sinizm ile örgütsel

bağlılık düzeyleri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. International Online Journal of Educational

Sciences, 4 (1), 196–205.

Kılınç, E. D. (2013). İlköğretim okullarında sinizm: Şanlıurfa örneği. Bilim ve Kültür - Uluslararası

Kültür Araştırmaları Dergisi. Sayı 2, s. 58-70.

Klein, D. N. (2009). The humor styles: use, impact, and relationship to cognitive appraisals.

(Unpublished Postdoctoral Study.) The University of Western Ontario, London.

Leymann, H. (1996). The content and development of mobbing at work. European Journal of

Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(2): 165-184.



16

Lobnikar B, Pagon M (2004). The prevalence and the nature of the police cynicism in Slovenia.

Retrieved from http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/Mesko/207979.pdf.

Malone, P. B. (1980). Humor: A double-edged tool for today’s managers? Academy of Management

Review, 5(3), 357-360.

Martin, R. A. (2007). The psychology of humor: An integrative approach. Burlington, MA: Elsevier

Academic Press.

Naus F., Ad, V. I. & Roe, R. (2007). Organizational cynicism: extending the exit, voice, loyalty,

and neglect model of employees’ responses to adverse conditions in the workplace. Human

Relations. 60(5), 683–718.

Neves, P. Organizational cynicism: Spillover effects on supervisor–subordinate relationships and

performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 23 (2012) 965–976.

Ocak, S. (2008). Öğretmenlerin duygusal taciz (mobbing)’e ilişkin algıları (Yayımlanmamış yüksek

lisans tezi). Trakya Üniversitesi, Edirne.

Okçu, V. (2011). Okul yöneticilerinin liderlik sitilleri ile öğretmenlerin örgütsel bağlılıkları ve

yıldırma yaşama düzeyleri arasındaki ilişkilerin incelenmesi (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Gazi

Üniversitesi, Ankara.

Özdemir, M. ve Açıkgöz, B. (2007). Mobbing’e maruz kalanların tepki seyirlerinin ölçümü. 15.

Ulusal Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresi, Sakarya Üniversitesi, Sakarya.

Özdemir, N. (2010). Mizah, eleştirel düşünce ve bilgelik: Nasreddin Hoca. Millî Folklor, 87, 27-40.

Özdemir, S., Sezgin, F., Kaya, Z., & Recepoğlu, E. (2011). İlköğretim okulu öğretmenlerinin stresle

başa çıkma tarzları ile kullandıkları mizah tarzları arasındaki ilişki. Educational Administration:

Theory and Practice, 17(3), 405-428.

Özekinci, Ö. (2012). Ortaöğretim okulu öğretmenlerinin yıldırma davranışları ile örgütsel

adanmışlıkları arasındaki ilişki. (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Necmettin Erbakan

Üniversitesi, Konya.

Özgan, H., Çetin, B., Kulekçi, E. (2011). İlköğretim kademesinde görev yapan öğretmenlerin

örgütsel sinizm düzeyinin bazı değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma

Dergisi, Sayı 11.

Özgener, Ş., Öğüt, A., Kaplan, M. (2008). İşgören-işveren ilişkilerinde yeni bir paradigma: Örgütsel

sinizm. M. Özdevecioğlu, H. Karadal (ed.), Örgütsel davranışta seçme konular organizasyonların

karanlık yönleri ve verimlilik azaltıcı davranışlar İçinde. Ankara, İlke Yayınevi.

Özler, D. E., Atalay, C. G. ve Şahin, M. D. (2008) . Mobbing’in örgütsel bağlılık üzerine etkisini

belirlemeye yönelik bir araştırma. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 28.

Polat, S. (2007). Ortaöğretim öğretmenlerinin örgütsel adalet algıları, örgütsel güven düzeyleri ile

örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışları arasındaki ilişki. (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Kocaeli

Üniversitesi, Kocaeli.

Polat, M. ve Meydan, C.H. (2010). Örgütsel özdeşleşmenin sinizm ve işten ayrılma niyeti ile ilişkisi

üzerine bir araştırma. Kara Harp Okulu Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, 9(1), 173-181.

Puderbaugh, A. (2006). The relationship between supervisors’ humor styles and subordinate job

satisfaction (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Capella University, United States.

Recepoğlu, E.(2008). Okul müdürlerinin mizah yeteneğinin öğretmenlerin iş doyumlarına etkisi.

Eğitim ve Bilim, 33(150). 74-86.

Recepoğlu, E., Kılınç, A. Ç., ve Çepni, O. (2011). Examining teachers' motivation level according

to school principals' humor styles. Educational Research and Reviews, 6(17), 928-934.

Romero, E. J., & Arendt, L. A. (2011). Variable effects of humor styles on organizational outcomes.

Psychological Reports, 108(2), 649-659.

Reichers, A. E., Wanous, J. P., & Austin, J. T. (1997). Understanding and managing cynicism about

organizational change. Academy of Management Executive, 11(1), 48-59.

Riley, D., Duncan, D. J., & Edwards, J. (2009). Investigation of staff bullying in Australian

Schools: executive summary. Retrieved from http://www.schoolbullies.org.au/ at 30.01.2013



17

Rubin, R. S., Dierdorff, E. C., Bommer, W. H., & Baldwin, T. T. (2009). Do leaders reap what they

sow? Leader and employee outcomes of leader organizational cynicism about change. The

Leadership Quarterly, 20, 680-688.

Sağır, T. ve Oğuz, E. (2012). Öğretmenlere yönelik örgütsel sinizm ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi.

International Journal of Human Sciences, 9(2).

Sağlam, A. Ç. (2008). Teachers’ views about mobbing (Psychological Violence) at elementary

schools. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 32, 133-142.

Samson, A. C., & Gross, J. J. (2012). Humour as emotion regulation: The differential consequences

of negative versus positive humour. Cognition & Emotion, 26(2), 375-384.

Savage, S. (2007). From humor in the workplace to humor as a means of healing from loss.

Synthesis Projec, Office of Graduate Studies, University of Massachusetts, Boston.

Shallcross, L. (2003). The workplace mobbing syndrome, response and prevention in the public

sector. Workplace Mobbing Conference, 16-17 October, Brisbane.

Susa, A. (2002). Humor type, orgnizational climate and outcomes; the shortest distance between an

organizations environment and the bottomline is laughter (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).

University of Nebraska, UMI Dissertation Information Service.

Tınaz, P. (2006a). İşyerinde psikolojik taciz. Work & Society, 4.

Tınaz, P. (2006b). Çalışma yaşamında psikolojik bir dram: mobbing.

http://www.toprakisveren.org.tr, (Erişim Tarihi:23.06.2012).

Tınaz, P., Bayram, F., Ergin, H. (2008). İşyerinde Psikolojik Taciz (Mobbing), Beta Yayınları,

İstanbul. DAHA BULUNMADI

Topkaya, N., Altınkurt, Y., Yılmaz , K. ve Dilek, S. A. (2013). Saygınlığını yitirme kaygısı ile

örgütsel sinizm arasındaki ilişki, Akademik Bakış Dergisi, Sayı 36, 1-20.

Tutar, I., Başlama, M. C., Kütahnecioğlu, N. ve Dereli, Ö. (2010). İşyerinde mobbing- duygusal

taciz: İzmir’de bir uygulama örneği. http://www.mskongre.org/ doc/isiltutar.doc, (Erişim

Tarihi:04.02.2010). DAHA BULUNMADI

Tuttle, A. C. (2006). Humor and leadership: subordinate perceptions of principal effectiveness as

influenced by humor (Unpublished doctoral disssertetion). Department Michigan University,

Michigan.

Warrick, D. D. (1981). Leadership styles and their consequences. Journal of Experiential Learning

and Simulation, 3(4), 155-172.

Wanous, J. P., Reichers, A. E. ve Austin, J. T. (1994).Organizational cynicism: an initial study.

Academy of Management Proceedings, 269-273.

Wu, C., Neubert, M. J., & Yi, X. (2007). Transformational leadership, cohesion perceptions, and

employee cynicism about organizational change the mediating role of justice perceptions. The

Journal of Applied Behavioral Sciences, 43(3), 327-351.

Yardımcı, İ. (2010). Mizah kavramı ve sanattaki yeri. Uşak Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi,

3(2), 1-41.

Yerlikaya, E. E. (2009). Üniversite öğrencilerinin mizah tarzları ile algılanan stres, kaygı ve

depresyon düzeyleri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Çukurova

Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Adana.

Yetim, S. A. ve Ceylan, Ö. Ö. (2011). Örgütsel sinizm ve örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışları

arasındaki ilişkiyi belirlemeye ilişkin bir araştırma. E-Journal of New World Sciences Academy, 6

(1), 682-695.



Examining the Relation between Humor Acts of School ... · where different points of view can live...

Documents

Transcript of Examining the Relation between Humor Acts of School ... · where different points of view can live...